A Shieldmaiden wrote:I would like to know why she doesn't wish to be here, yet makes demands on people she despises.

You can be a sheep and follow without question, your decision.

I've made no implications of despising this board. I don't.My reasons are my own.

The way I see it, you could spend the rest of your life rehashing the moral implications of what he did, giving judgment, taking it back, jerking off to your own sense of justice, whatever rocks your socks, mamacita. That, or you could take 10 minutes to grant someone the most honorable gift of acknowledging him as a person in a place where he is completely dehumanized.

I am no psychologist, but one thing that I am quite certain of, is that if I wish for someone to acknowledge their blame and make a conscious effort to reform himself, the absolutely wrong way to go about it is to give indifference.

Just keep in mind, while sipping on your chamomile tea and pondering on the many degrees of blame and accountability that zoots has rightfully earned,that on the other side of this, there is a person who feels hunger, cold, and despair just like any other, no matter what he did. One that has gone through due process and is paying very heavily for what he did.

Let your actions show us who you are. Or don't, whatever. I don't care about you.

You chose to not include this part in your reply and I wonder why, just as you choose to not give a reason why you no longer post here. You took the responsibility in continuing correspondence with him and now you want to enlist others to lessen that load, perhaps the real truth of this is, you now realise your mistake.

In the Barnes and Noble Children's section?

He's not really that stupid. Where did he think children would be?

I know he's your friend, but the story he told another group of people was that it happened on the subway platform by accident and the girl was 10... He's never going to stop going to jail until he understands that he has to take full responsibility and he has to actually have sincere remorse (and not continue to make excuses for his bad behavior) for the things he's done. Until he's really held accountable within himself and others hold him accountable as well, he will never learn.

I'm not generally a judgmental person, but I am a person who understands that sexual deviants who are unrepentant and continually lie and get caught repeatedly for the same things are not safe to interact with on any level until they become honest and forthright people. People who understand and are aware of their impact on society, specifically on the innocent and unable to protect themselves. It doesn't do him any favors to cover for his lies or allow him to continue his delusions.

Just tell Zoot that I miss him, and tell him it's not fair that women are commodifying sex, so he triggers their denial system by making it more free when he escalates approach. That's just the way this world works, and he's not helping anyone by trying to stand his ground to this regard. Don't be the thing you hate. My very sincere grievance that it went as far as prison.

MagsJ wrote:Iam.. please post relevant to the topic, and please remember this for all future posts. Thank you in advance.

Fair enough.

But there are in fact other ways to look at it.

Mine for example.

I originally opened this thread because when Zoot was once among us, he and I had our fair share of exchanges. We got along rather well as I recall. For one thing, his posts were quite often in the general vicinity of that which many here construe to be actual philosophy.

And he was clearly no Kid.

Then Turd noted this on the thread:

And I already stated my position on Zoots a while back. Yes, he is the supreme forum idiot, he literally makes his own problems, he is a dum-dum Neo-Nazis who seems to of literally joined for a sense of community, cause they are the last group left willing to embrace him. Most of his philosophy beyond this is Nietzschean mumbo-jumbo like will, strength, value, power.... when I see people on the forum mumble shit using those words I tend not to reply, cause they are saying nothing to me, they are purely empty technical words that make it appear your saying something intelligent, and that only works on damn fools.

To which I rejoined:

You forgot to mention that he seemed to get along rather well with me here.

Shieldmaiden, your country was a fucking prison at one point. That is clear evidence that inmates have a future, and it is best to encourage them to good living and social outlooks, like community and friendship. If Australia didn't, modern Australia wouldn't exist. Nobody expects you to to cease being a twat, but it be awesome if you tried on occasions like there.

Support "The Angels of East Africa" on smile.Amazon.com it is free to do, they donate 0.05% of your purchase cost to them, or give donations directly via:

Turd Ferguson wrote:Shieldmaiden, your country was a fucking prison at one point. That is clear evidence that inmates have a future, and it is best to encourage them to good living and social outlooks, like community and friendship. If Australia didn't, modern Australia wouldn't exist. Nobody expects you to to cease being a twat, but it be awesome if you tried on occasions like there.

I don't know, Mags, it's your call, but...

He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

He was still human, despite all his problems. And he didn't stick to one topic, always insisting whatever the thread, that we have a long standing discussion on Marxism or Nazism. I am about as impressed with his ideas in this area as your Dasein.

If you had any brains, you would of picked up early on people like diversity of thought, linking other kinds of ideas together. If you did something awesome, like tackled the nature of logic to Dasien, by ripping apart a theory of logic some logician has, giving great insight to how your idea is applicable in a wider world- in other words make it useful, I would look. You don't, your were super repetitive, and only wanted a argument absolutely on your terms. This is like a ancient army of archers demanding people only assault the only on this one hill, and you have to travel to their country and fight them only there. Nobody gonna do that.

You gotta show your relative, that you still matter, that you didn't fossilize into a useless idea decades ago, that your still dynamic. If I saw in Zoots he could only ever be a Nazi Jailbird, I would reject him. He isn't, he still is in flux. You.... your a one trick pony. I see you try to vary your response sometimes now post-banning, but your not expanding your philosophy into a direction useful to anyone. Nobody will adopt your ideas after you die as they currently are. If you started posting threads how your idea reacts in response to Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Kant.... I would feel perhaps it is better to keep you around as you would remain relevant. As you stand now, I haven't seen evidence of you expanding your ideas. I think I learned all I can from you, and I'm dissapointed at the very low pickings offered. I would rather be inspired. You seem absolutely opposed to making your ideas useful or relevant to anyone. Hence why your constantly rejected. You really gotta force a intellectual expansion. Try a commentary on a classical work in philosophy, picking it apart with your ideas, a critique. Something that would surprise us. None of this "go waste your time in my retarded thread" shit. You know I never ever will post there, you come off as dead and retarded, I will sooner sit to a discyssion by The Rainman on why rain is scary, but the shower is okay. If that fucker popped up every day demanding I gear him out, I would just completely ignore him. I might say why just once, and only once, knowing the futility. He be like "I only want to discuss why rain is scary under my terms".

Now wouldn't it be interesting if that idiot savant expanded his ideas to why it is okay to not want to walk through hurricanes and tornadoes, but it us okay to walk in the rain, by discussing Theophrastus' work on the clouds? That be like, WTF, you read Theophrastus? Yeah, hurricanes are scary. You remember when the house landed on the witch in The Wizard of Oz?

You don't do that. You just cry and bitch about the rain, and everyone treats you like a pointless idiot. You don't even have the interesting charm of the rainman, where we can explore your story. It's a repetitive dead end. I've heard your biography 50 times.

Turd Ferguson wrote: He was still human, despite all his problems. And he didn't stick to one topic, always insisting whatever the thread, that we have a long standing discussion on Marxism or Nazism. I am about as impressed with his ideas in this area as your Dasein.

I'm impressed only to the extent that the objectivist [Nazi, Marxist, Christian, Hindu, liberal, conservative, meat eater, vegetarian], is able to demonstrate that the manner in which he embraces particular moral and political values "in his head", is the manner in which all rational and virtuous men and women are in turn obligated to embrace them too.

That ubiquitous [and rather contemptuous] "one of us" vs. "one of them" frame of mind.

Turd Ferguson wrote: If you had any brains, you would of picked up early on people like diversity of thought, linking other kinds of ideas together.

Okay, note some actual examples of folks you have known who did have brains -- folks you could respect -- but who did not accept your own point of view.

Objectivists almost always refuse to go there. Why? Because if they admit that the values of others can be derived no less intelligently then they derive their own then they are admiting that they might be wrong. Or that others can embrace conflicting goods for rational reasons. This entails considering the possibility that "you're right from your side and I'm right from mine" is a legitimate moral concoction.

But if that's the case what of the conviction that folks are either "one of us" or "one of them"? And, in my view, it is this psychological certainty that propels the objectivists along. "I" must be grounded in one or another teleological font.

Thus Trump got elected because he ought to have gotten elected not because he got the most Electoral College votes.

But then this scholastic shit:

Turd Ferguson wrote: If you did something awesome, like tackled the nature of logic to Dasien, by ripping apart a theory of logic some logician has, giving great insight to how your idea is applicable in a wider world- in other words make it useful, I would look. You don't, your were super repetitive, and only wanted a argument absolutely on your terms. This is like a ancient army of archers demanding people only assault the only on this one hill, and you have to travel to their country and fight them only there. Nobody gonna do that.

Note to others: What "on earth" is this supposed to mean? For all practical purposes in other words.

Turd Ferguson wrote: You gotta show your relative, that you still matter, that you didn't fossilize into a useless idea decades ago, that your still dynamic. If I saw in Zoots he could only ever be a Nazi Jailbird, I would reject him. He isn't, he still is in flux.

But not you, right? You are another Hegelian idealist and all of the ideas that have percolated throughout the entirety of human history have finally come to settle down once and for all in the ultimate [the optimal] synthesis --- the one inside your head.

Turd Ferguson wrote: You.... your a one trick pony. I see you try to vary your response sometimes now post-banning, but your not expanding your philosophy into a direction useful to anyone. Nobody will adopt your ideas after you die as they currently are. If you started posting threads how your idea reacts in response to Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Kant.... I would feel perhaps it is better to keep you around as you would remain relevant. As you stand now, I haven't seen evidence of you expanding your ideas. I think I learned all I can from you, and I'm dissapointed at the very low pickings offered. I would rather be inspired. You seem absolutely opposed to making your ideas useful or relevant to anyone. Hence why your constantly rejected. You really gotta force a intellectual expansion. Try a commentary on a classical work in philosophy, picking it apart with your ideas, a critique. Something that would surprise us. None of this "go waste your time in my retarded thread" shit. You know I never ever will post there, you come off as dead and retarded, I will sooner sit to a discyssion by The Rainman on why rain is scary, but the shower is okay. If that fucker popped up every day demanding I gear him out, I would just completely ignore him. I might say why just once, and only once, knowing the futility. He be like "I only want to discuss why rain is scary under my terms".

Note to others:

Again, all I can do to effectively respond to this intellectual drivel is to ask him to choose a particular value judgment of his own and bring it down to earth. For example, how is all of this related to his defense of Donald Trump? We can start there.

Turd Ferguson wrote: Now wouldn't it be interesting if that idiot savant expanded his ideas to why it is okay to not want to walk through hurricanes and tornadoes, but it us okay to walk in the rain, by discussing Theophrastus' work on the clouds? That be like, WTF, you read Theophrastus? Yeah, hurricanes are scary. You remember when the house landed on the witch in The Wizard of Oz?

Let me ask you this then...

Pertaining to the manner in which I construe the meaning of dasein, conflicting goods and political economy [relevant to conflicted human social, political and economic interactions], how would a reading of Theophrastus -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophrastus -- lend insights with regard to these moral and political conflagrations.

Turd Ferguson wrote: You don't do that. You just cry and bitch about the rain, and everyone treats you like a pointless idiot. You don't even have the interesting charm of the rainman, where we can explore your story. It's a repetitive dead end. I've heard your biography 50 times.

Note to others:

Why do you suppose I invarably reduce objectivists of Turd's ilk down to this rather pathetic huffing and puffing?

I have my own suspicions of course but I'd welcome the insights of others.

As we patiently await Zoot's return to weigh in himself.

He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Shieldmaiden, your country was a fucking prison at one point. That is clear evidence that inmates have a future, and it is best to encourage them to good living and social outlooks, like community and friendship. If Australia didn't, modern Australia wouldn't exist. Nobody expects you to to cease being a twat, but it be awesome if you tried on occasions like there.

Just to refresh your selective or ailing memory. English convicts were transported to America until 1793 when they refused to accept any more, so then transportation to NSW became the solution.

Many convicts were transported for petty crimes, while a significant number were political prisoners.

The serious crimes, such as rape and murder, were punished by death, and therefore not transportable offences.

You Turd have turned into a feminised motor mouthed wuus, all that walking/wanking has chaffed your balls into extinction.